Using a Computer-Adapted, Conceptually Based History Text to Increase Comprehension and Problem-Solving Skills of Students with Disabilities

Journal of Special Education Technology

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 5-16

  Twyman, Todd ^a   Tindal, Gerald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79954475251     PISSN: 01626434     EISSN: 23813121     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/016264340602100201     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Alexander P. A., Murphy P. K., (1998). The research base for APA's learner-centered principles. In Lambert N. M., McCombs B. L., (Eds.), Issues in school reform: A sampler of psychological perspectives on learner-centered schools (pp. 25–60). Washington, DC: The American Psychological Association.
2. Armbruster B. B., (1984). The problem of inconsiderate text. In Duffy G., Mason J., (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Perspectives and suggestions (pp. 207–217). New York: Longman.
3. Armbruster B., Nagy W., (1992). Vocabulary in content area lessons (Reading to learn). Reading Teacher, 45(7), 550–551.
4. Beck I. L., McKeown M. G., Gromoll E. W., (1989). Learning from social studies texts. Cognition & Instruction, 6(2), 99–104.
5. Behavioral Research and Teaching. (2000). Cyberschool history. http://brt.uoregon.edu/cyberschool/history/.
6. Bransford J. D., Brown A. L., Cocking R. R., (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
7. Caros J.S., (1996). Content area assessment: Technical adequacy of standardized, short-duration, alternate-form, curriculum-based measures of content area vocabulary for monitoring student progress with eighth-graders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
8. Dalton B., Morocco C., Tivnan T., Rawson P., (1997). Supported inquiry science: Teaching for conceptual change in urban and suburban science classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 261–269.
9. Edyburn D. L., (2001). 2000 in review: A synthesis of the special education technology literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 16(2), 1–36.
10. Edyburn D. L., (2002). 2001 in review: A synthesis of the special education technology literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 17(2), 1–45.
11. Edyburn D. L., (2003). 2002 in review: A synthesis of the special education technology literature. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(3), 1–18.
12. Ellis E. G., Esler A., (1999). World history: Connections to today. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13. Ferretti R. P., MacArthur C. D., Okolo C. M., (2001). Teaching for historical understanding in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 59–71.
14. Ferretti R. P., MacArthur C. D., Okolo C. M., (2002). Teaching effectively about historical things. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(6), 66–69.
15. Ferretti R. P., Okolo C. M., (1996). Authenticity in learning: Multimedia design projects in social studies for students with disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 450–460.
16. Fitzgerald G. E., Koury K. A., (1996). Empirical advances in technology-assisted instruction for students with mild and moderate disabilities. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(4), 1–24.
17. Garner R., (1990). When children and adults do not use learning strategies: Toward a theory of settings. Review of Educational Research, 60(4), 517–529.
18. Garner R., (1992). Learning from school text. Educational Psychology, 27(1), 53–63.
19. Gersten R., Fuchs L., Williams J., Baker S., (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 71(2), 279–320.
20. Glaser C. W., Rieth H. J., Kinzer C. K., Colburn L. K., Peter J., (1999). A description of the impact of multimedia anchored instruction on classroom interactions. Journal of Special Education Technology, 14(2), 27–43.
21. Higgins K., Boone R., (1990). Hypertext study guides and social studies achievement of students with learning disabilities, remedial students, and regular education students. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(9), 529–540.
22. Higgins K., Boone R., (1996). Hypertext support for remedial students and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(4), 402–413.
23. Higgins K., Boone R., Lovitt T. C., (1996). Hypertext support for remedial students and students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(4), 402–412.
24. Hitchcock C., Stahl S., (2003). Assistive technology, universal design, universal design for learning: Improved learning opportunities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(4), 1–24.
25. Hollenbeck K., Tindal G., (1996). Teaching law concepts within mainstreamed middle school social studies settings. Diagnostique, 21(4), 37–58.
26. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1414 (2004).
27. Joehnk R., Tindal G. A., Nolet V., Hollenbeck K., (2003). Explanation flowchart scoring. Unpublished manuscript.
28. Jonassen D. H., (2000). Computers as mindtools in schools: Engaging critical thinking. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
29. Jonassen D. H., Carr C., Yueh H. P., (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. Techtrends, 43(2), 24–32.
30. Klausmeier H.J., (1992). Concept learning and concept teaching. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 267–286.
31. Lyman F., (1981). The responsive classroom discussion. In Anderson A. S., (Ed.), Mainstreaming Digest, College Park, MD: University of Maryland College of Education.
32. Mastropieri M. A., Scruggs T. E., (1994) Text versus hands-on science curriculum. Remedial and Special Education, 15(2), 72–85.
33. McCleery J. A., Tindal G., (1999). Teaching the scientific method to at-risk students and students with learning disabilities through concept anchoring and explicit instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 20(1), 7–18.
34. McGrew S., Woodcock R. W., (2001). Technical manual. Woodcock-Johnson III: Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
35. Ogle D. M., (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active learning of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564–570.
36. Okolo C. M., (2005). Interactive technologies and social studies instruction for students with mild disabilities. In Edyburn D., Higgins K., Boone R., (Eds.), Handbook of special education technology research and practice (623–641). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design, Inc.
37. Okolo C. M., Ferretti R. P., (1996). Knowledge acquisition and technology-supported projects in the social studies for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13(2), 91–103.
38. Okolo C. M., Ferretti R. P., MacArthur C. D., (2002). Westward expansion and the the-year old mind: Teaching for historical understanding in a diverse classroom. In Brophy J. E., Gersten R., Fuchs L., Williams J., Baker S., (2002), Advances in research on teaching. Volume 9. Social constructivist teaching. Affordance and constraints (pp. 120–136). New York: JAI Press.
39. Oregon Department of Education. (2002). Oregon standards. Retrieved June 23, 2004 from http://www.ode.state.or.us/cifs/newspaper/newspaper-2003-04.pdf.
40. Parker R., Hasbrouck J., Tindal G., (1992). The maze as a classroom-based reading measure: Construction methods, reliability, and validity. The Journal of Special Education, 26(2), 195–218.
41. Perkins D. N., Salomon G., (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25.
42. Prater M. A., (1993). Teaching concepts: Procedures for the design and delivery of instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 14(5), 51–62.
43. Roid G. H., Haladyna T. M., (1982). A technology for test item writing. New York: Academic Press.
44. Rose D. H., Meyer A., (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
45. Salomon G., Perkins D. N., Globerson T., (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2–9.
46. Schwartz I., Baer D., (1991). Social validity assessment: Is current practice state of the art? Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24, 189–204.
47. Shinn M. R., (Ed.). (1998). Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement. New York: Guilford Press.
48. Sinclair U., (2001). The Jungle. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc.
49. Taba H., (1969). Teaching strategies and cognitive functioning in elementary school children (Cooperative research project 2404). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education.
50. Tindal G.A., Nolet V., Blake G., (1992). Focus on teaching and learning in content classes (Training Module No. 3). Eugene: University of Oregon, Behavioral Research and Teaching.
51. Tindal G., Nolet V., (1995). Curriculum-based measurement in middle and high schools: Critical thinking skills in content areas. Focus on Exceptional Children, 27(3), 1–14.
52. Twyman T., (2003). Effects of a conceptually framed, problem/solution/effect graphic organizer on content comprehension and problem solving skills for seventh grade social studies students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
53. Twyman T., McCleery J. A., Tindal G., (2004). Exploring a concept-based instructional approach to increase geography achievement for at-risk students and students with disabilities. Unpublished manuscript.
54. Twyman T., McCleery J.A., Tindal G., (in press). Using concepts to frame history content. Journal of Experimental Education.
55. Vallecorsa A. L., deBettencourt L. U., (1997). Using a mapping procedure to teach reading and writing skills to middle grade students with learning disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 20(2), 173–188.
56. Wineburg S., (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
57. Wolf M. M., (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.